Pretty sure Hoke makes it clear. Visit before you commit and know you want to be at Michigan. Onward and upward. But oh man would i hate Oregon if they take another one. They are snakey when it comes to recruiting. Get in on guys late. Brown, Fisher, and now going after Conley.

When we offered Conley his only offers were NW and Marshall if I'm not mistaken? Gotta think high caliber teams realizing how good of a player he really is, is starting to turn his attention to see other teams. Hopefully we can keep him, but if the Hoke policy goes into effect, then the full court press begins on McQuay.

It's not old-fashioned. They tell kids NOT to commit unless they are certain. It's actually a really respectable approach. They're not like a bunch of programs that pressure guys until they make an emotional decision and commit. I love it. Plus, it's worked so far.

What is the point of looking around? To find something better? Exactly! Looking around means he is not committed to Michigan. Also meaning that Michigan should not be committed to him. The staff makes sure the prospects know the drill before they commit.

Commit after commit has stated that they appreciate the approach taken by Michigan coaches. Not appying pressure but making sure the kid is ready. Would you rather sit in a room with coach Saban giving a sales pitch making promises he can't keep, or sit in a room with Hoke telling you to be sure before you make a commitment? Being to Michigan or another school.

You know who says that? Guys who committed to Michigan. We don't tend to get lots of feedback on Michigan's recruiting from guys who didn't commit to Michigan.

You know who probably doesn't appreciate Hoke's method of recruiting? The top 50ish guy who actually wants to take his time, has options, take all 5 official visits, and make the most informed decision. That's assuming the rules of "You can commit whenever but there may not be a spot" even apply to that player. I'm sure there's a legion of 3* dudes out there who would love to come play WR.

I know but that's life. If I get offered a very good job, I don't get forever to decide if I want it or not. If I'm still waiting on jobs I might like better, I might miss out on that job. If I meet a girl who really likes me, and I don't commit to being her boyfriend because there are other girls I'd like to check out, I might miss out on that girl.

This is how life works with most "positions" that are sought after and limited in number. If you get your window of opportunity to take it, it usually doesn't last forever.

Insecure or not, these decisions, decommits, etc. impact the lives of 10 coaches, 100 football players, and numerous other staff members, let alone fans. Coaches have to do what's best for their program. If Hoke believes this is best for Michigan, then that's the way he needs to do it.

It's not like Michigan is the only one with this policy. Oregon, the same school who is trying to swoop in, also have a no visit policy if you commit. I don't blame schools for recruiting to the bell either. It's not like Hoke didn't go all out to sway Dunn last year.

I used to like Burger King burgers, until I tried one from In-and-Out. Then I thought that was awesome. But then I had a Five Guys burger and that even better. So I agree, looking around will only lead you away from the things you originally liked. But it can lead to some delicious things.

It's not like Hoke is pulling the offer if he says he considers Conley or anyone else not committed. It just means that the staff is able to fill that spot, if necessary, with someone else who less likely to possibly leave Michigan in the lurch. Seems perfectly reasonable to me. Call him uncommitted and go back to courting him like someone you are trying to get to commit. I don't see how that poisons the well.

You're being willfully blind if you think Michigan's policy is putting less pressure on recruits.

On one hand the coaches tell recruits to only commit if they're sure, and on the other they say that their spot may not be available if they continue to wait. if you were a 3ish star guy like Conley was and your best other offers were low BCS/MAC level, you jump on that offer like a Great White on a seal.

Now that Conley's been blowing up, he's getting offers from other high level BCS teams and realizing he has other options. it would be nice if he stuck with Michigan, but its not exactly shocking that he may be rethinking the biggest (well, probably the biggest) decision of his life so far.

I don't even understand why people are so excited about the opportunity to get McQuay instead of Conley. Conley has shown far more interest in Michigan than McQuay ever has.

so why didnt he just wait? We have seen in recruiting that some recruits use offers from one school to garner offers from other schools ( not saying this is the case hear). This is where a early signing period would help or a policy where u can offer a recruit until July 1st of their upcoming senior year. In this situation, it seems like the visits are not entirely his choice.

It definitely puts more pressure on recruits ... if they actually want to go to Michigan. What it stops is the M Decommit All-Stars (Pearlie Graves, Dequinta Jones, Kevin Newsome, Anthony Fera, Shavodrick Beaver ... I'm sure there are more that I've forgotten) who "committed" so that they had a BCS slot, then looked around until the found someplace they really wanted. Michigan was their safety school. Do you really want Michigan to be the safety school for, IDK, Texas Tech, Tulsa, and Arkansas?

Every other kid in the class has been able to deal with it. I like the policy. So many of these kids would have visited other schools and just based on averages a couple would have left. This policy has greatly limited my concern when it comes to decommits.

No one is saying fuck off Conley, people are just saying that he should either stay committed and not take visits, or decommit and do whatever he wants. What I'm saying is that he can't have his cake and eat it too. That's not mean, it's fair to both sides.

If someone doesn't like the policy, they can go elsewhere. I like it because it is decisive, clear and applies equally. And, I especially like that Hoke doesn't give a shit if people don't like it. The next time *you* are the head coach of Michigan, you get to pick the policy.

I agree with the last part completely. They'll have to work harder for Conley. But if he's not committed to us, why should we be committed to him? It has to be a two way street. USC has a kid looking around, and SC is looking to fill his spot. We should be doing the same.

If you're a man, you can't get married until you've decided on a mate. You can't pick a wife, and then go around dating to see who the best one is for you. You do that part first. If you decide you made your commitment too early and you need to look at your options, don't expect your wife to be waiting around for you afterward. She might be, but don't be surprised if she found someone to replace you in the meantime.

Your analogy needs work. The recruits are not married to us until they sign their letter of intent, until that time they are free to do as they please without penalty. If you can't trust someone to "look around", then why do we even want them in our program to begin with?

I actually like Kiffin's policy, his recruits can take as many visits as they like as long as they make USC their last visit.

No, they are committed to us before signing day, just not legally so. There is a commitment there. They want us to save their spot, right? So they expect a commitment from Michigan. We should expect a commitment from them.

If they aren't sure Michigan is for them, that's OK. But they can't expect us to save their spot while they figure it out.

Ok, I reread your post, and it was a little confusing how you referred to the school as your wife when I think you meant fiancee. Regardless, I still think the policy is outdated. I do understand both sides of the coin, sure we have a policy that "forbids" commits from visiting other schools, but the only thing we are doing is guaranteeing a decommit like P. Brown (would he have stayed with UM if we didn't automatically pull his commitment? I guess we will never know...), or postponing a possible commit like L. Treadwell or D. Green (obviously I don't know if they would have commited already, but who knows if they would have commited if they knew they could still visit other schools).

Additionally, even with our current policy, we still have to continue recruiting players until NSD even when the class is full of commits, so that argument holds little weight.

It would be more like trusting the GF to go out with her parents and not cheat on you if another guy buys her a drink. If your relationship isn't strong enough for that, then maybe you weren't meant to be in the first place.

Switching metaphors - its essentially the same process as getting recruited for a job senior year. This is essentially the only time in the process where you/the recruit will have any control whatsoever, so you should take your time and take all of your visits/interviews. If you are a quality candidate in high demand and happen to get multiple offers, take your time to consider which company you want to work for.

Good companies don't tend to pressure their top candidates with deadlines or forbid them from interviewing with other companies. I don't even know what my reaction would have been had a company told me that 5 people had been offered for 1 spot and I could take all the time I wanted but the position could be gone if I took too long.

Trying to put myself/you in the shoes of a highly ranked HS Recruit. You got options, you interview well, you got a degree from a good school, had a good internship, etc. In the corporate world you're the equivalant of a Rivals 100 recruit.

Companies don't tend to threaten to pull offers, offer multiple people a job for which they only have 1 opening and so on because that's a great way to piss off the people you're recruiting. Then the underclassmen will hear through the grapevine that the Walt Disney Co. acted like dicks to their recruits, and suddenly they won't get the same caliber of applicants.

And guess which program has told certain kids that they have all the time in the world to decide? Michigan. From what it sounds like, Treadwell can take as much time as he wants, the coaches will hols a spot for them. They did that with Pipkins last summer. They even turned a top 100 kid away (Day) because they told Ondre' that there was a spot for him. It's certain kids they think are program changers that they hold spots for. Conley is a nice prospect, but is he a game changer? I don't know. I bet you, whether right or wrong, the coaches have an opinion.

I just don't know how some of these kids know what the right decision is if they don't get to take visits other places. if all you've seen is Michigan, how do you know that Michigan is actually what's truly best for you? Again, if my best offers are NW and MAC and I know I need to make this decision now or not have a spot, guess what? And if USC and Florida come calling later on, well, why is it wrong to go visit? Policy seems unfair to the recruits while the coaches come out looking good.

That's kind of the point. They're saying, don't commit to Michigan unless you are ready to COMMIT TO MICHIGAN. Everyone hates on Treadwell because he hasn't committed yet, but I respect the fact that he wants to look around FIRST before he makes his commitment. Conley made a commitment to Michigan and is now having second thoughts, okay I get where he's coming from, but Michigan isn't going to hold his spot for him.

Who said they didn't visit other places? The unofficial visits were all the rage last spring. Most of our early commits had either visited other schools or had been a fan of UM for a long time. Just because they didn't get a free trip doesn't mean they didn't visit. Some kids wanted to get the process over quickly.

I've yet to see a company "we'll hold a spot for you indefinitely." Do you really think that every company you've ever applied to work for would hold that position indefinitely? I'll give you a heads up, even if the don't tell you so, waiting long enough will result in your spot being filled.

It's not at all like your gf going out with the parents. It's going out on a date with another guy, knowing he's going to try and recruit you away....and letting him take her to his place. Yours would be a recruit taking a trip to Disneyland, and running into Lane Kiffin there and listening to what he has to say.

And in the latter, if you go in and say "I agree to take the job", sake hands, but haven't filled out the paperwork with human resources, and then go hear a competing company's sales pitch after the first company has stopped looking to fill the position, they're going to be pissed. Unless you are clearly the top in your field, good luck getting that job.

Since everyone seems to be into comparing this situation to a dating relationship, I'll pose my view. I would rather find out if my fiancee was "committed" to me before we got married. Now this does not mean I need her to sleep with or date other guys to find out, but if she wasn't solid on getting married, then I would prefer it to find out she wanted to do those things now rather than after the marriage. So if I were in that situation where I knew my "fiancee" wanted to go on a "harmless" date with a guy friend, I could either say no (the Hoke policy), or say go ahead, just talk to me afterwards (the Kiffin policy, ok not a great analogy but whatever).

So if I had Hoke's policy, she might do it anyway and have a horrible date, but since I dumped her, she is too prideful to get back with me and she ends up picking a douche (MSU, OSU) to get back at me because I was too controlling. Or she would not go on the date, and we end up getting a divorce because she always had a feeling that there was something else out there for her, in doing so, wasting both our time.

And if I had Kiffin's policy, after the date, I would be able to get the "last" date and at least know where I stand (and yes, this is assuming the "fiancee" is honest with me).

I get your point, but think of it like there is a day when you HAVE to get married (NSD). If you let your wife go on dates a couple months before that date, and a couple months later she bails on you, you're fucked. You need someone on that wedding day. Unlike marriage, having someone on that day is way better than no one, so if your fiancée wants to date, you say OK, I'm finding someone else.

If my fiance wasn't solid on getting married, why would she say yes? That's the point of the situation. Hoke is saying he wants the kids to be sure before they tell him they are going to go to the school. Sure there may be some pressure to commit, but that's the choice they make. If the kids want to be part of the class, than they are committed to Michigan. If they want to look around later, than so can Michigan.

It's like Hoke sort of saving a spot for someone, then someone better falls in their lap and they dump the first kid they accepted a verbal commitment on. If a spot is saved, it is saved. If a kid commits but keeps looking, he isn't quite sure. The staff needs to know the kid is on board. It's not a "fuck off" at all. It's a clear policy. You really can't bitch about the rules that are set and out in the open, especially if you chose to play by them (by committing to a school with the policy)

So you are legally bound to your wife while you are engaged? If I dated other women while I was engaged, my fiance would have dumped me just like I would have dumped her if she did the same. Eventhough we weren't legally committed to eachother, we were committed by our intentions. That's what a verbal commit is, the intention to sign on the dotted line.

I think Conley should do what he wants to. If he wants to visit Cinci or Oregon, or Tiffin, he should. If he feels that he needs to look around, by all means he should. That doesn't mean that Michigan needs to wait while he decides. He may not make up his mind until December or January. They don't want to get caught trying to recruit a lesser recruit if he decides to bolt down the line. I don't want to see him go, but that doesn't mean I think a particular player we are still recruiting is better.

I agree with this. It is the intention by both sides to commit to each other that is what Hoke stresses. I don't see the issue with Michigan and a prospective athlete having this verbal mutual understanding but is this a legally binding agreement? Of course not.

I respectfully disagree. Michigan is a national brand that can recruit kids from across the country. It may sound harsh, but the coaches don't want to be jerked around by a recruit who's only trying to save himself a spot in case plan's A, B, etc. fall through (Not saying this is what Conley is doing, but there are recruits like this).

If a recruit wants to take a visit or two, that's fine, but they need to know that their spot might not be available the next time they call. Conley obviously knows our recruiting situation, and if someone like McQuay or Treadwell fills his spot, that's that.

We had 25 commits last year, and have one of the biggest classes so far this year as well. It doesn't seem unrealistic to me is 48 players in the past 2 years have committed knowing the coaching staff's stance on visits.

When you say something trolly, you can't just say, "it must be the TRUTH, because the truth gets marked 'trolling.'" That's like me saying, "I knew Kate Upton would reject me, because most women are intimidated by guys who are 5'9"." It may be true in some cases, but Occam's Razon suggests other explanations might be more reasonable.

This class has kids from Colorado, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, NorthCarolina and Maryland. But only three from outside of the Midwest?

Anyway, your point about us not being great in the last few years doesn't matter. We're a school people recognize and want to go to. Even so, Hoke has a very straightforward policy. Commit to us, we'll commit to you. It's the most fair.

to your posts without questioning your intelligence. You've called the staff stupid and cowardly.and attacked the program's reputation. I guessed we must be doomed to mediocre or worse recruiting classes then. Either that, or something about this issue turns you into a trolling moron. Pretty much nothing you've said makes a bit of sense.

If everyone is telling you that you are not only wrong, but kinda coming off as a dick, everyone may just be right. Though if you think you're obviously smarter than EVERYONE else, it might be someone else with Christ-like delusions.

When RR was coaching he was criticized for overlooking local prospects to focus on national recruits. You say 2007 was national recruiting, but so was 2008, and 2009, and 2010. JB Fitz, Stonum, Tae Odoms, Denard, Lewan, Smith, Roh, Gallon, and Dileo for example. 2011 was a frenzied last minute class, but in 2012 and 2013 Hoke has offered 193, and 135 kids from across the entire country. Hoke's taken 16 commitments from outside the B1G so far including Countess, and Bellomy, Chesson, Pipkins, and Magnuson, Poggi, Hurst, and Chris Fox, and will likely get 3 more.

Most of the top national prospects offered kept Michigan in their top group until the end last year, and this year we're close to landing the top WR in the entire country, the top RB in the entire country, and the top FS. All of them nationally recruited. We don't seldom recruit outside the midwest, we regularly do. The coaches cast a much wider net than most schools like Texas and Florida do for recruits.

I think you need to take another look before declaring the coaches having tunnel vision when it comes to recruiting as an undeniable fact. It takes a pretty active imagination to find fault with the coaches pulling the #21 class at the 11th hour, the #7 class, and now potentially the #1 overall class.

Is that it goes both ways. You say you're committed to Michigan, and it's your spot, unlike what goes on at other schools.

That said, these are high school juniors, primarily, when they make what is, to date, probably the most important decision they've ever made. And some of them will make a decision that one or both parents don't agree with, for whatever reason, and that needs to get hammered out sometime. Other times they'll make a decision and regret it themselves.

I hope Conley stays because I think he's a great player, and it's impossible for me to believe he wouldn't love MIchigan, because who couldn't love Michigan. But that said, it's better for him to be honest that he's unsure he made the right decision, as opposed to next summer, or in two years. And, if in the time that he's looking at other schools, his spot is filled, that will potentially be unfortunate for him, but it will have been his choice.

His best option is to come to Michigan. Obviously he wants to take visits so that's tenuous.

Make no mistake we lost a stud last year in Brown, and Conley is really good as well. I still think he goes to Michigan but possibly losing a player to Cincinnatti or Oregon is a joke. I live near Eugene.

I believe Gareon is the kid with mom living on the West Coast who is encouraging visits out that way. Too bad a kid is being pulled in so many directions, but he shouldn't have committed to a school if he thought he may have second thoughts about it.

Dawson's Twitter post makes me think it's more of a message to the coaches than to the fans. In other words, "The coaches better not let this happen if they didn't let me go on a visit." And I don't think he has anything to worry about.

Well, I was waiting for the board to get wind of this. I have a colleague that coaches at Massillon, and for what it's worth, he told me that something like this was going to happen when I spoke with him this morning. Also, he said that Oregon was sending the entire staff to see Conley next week, and that Conley had said that Oregon was the school he would jump at if they offered. (I told my friend that duh, they're going to offer if they are indeed sending the entire staff).

That is the end of my insight. Didn't know anything about this Cinci thing. Again, take it for what it's worth.

Thankfully, Stribling is looking very good, and so is Lewis. Ross Douglas is solid as well, so CB isn't exactly a position of major need for this class. Hopefully we can get McQuay or an equivalent to replace him if he decides to bail.

You're right. I always take the position that if a kid doesn't want to be at UM 100%, then good luck elsewhere. It is his life, and as you've stated earlier, his decision. And we need to remember that Shawn Crable is on Conley's coaching staff there, so the kid's got a UM grad to talk to about these things. By all accounts, Conley's a stud, but this is an extremely important decision for someone still in high school, so if he feels like UM isn't really the best fit for him, then it isn't the best fit. This point seems especially true considering all the defections from the program in the last few years. Usually, the best decision for the kid is the best decision for the university.

I like the stance of these coaches. My thoughts exactly when someone above said that it needs to be a 2 way street. If a player is looking around then he certainly isn't committed to us, as a result we don't need to be commiitted to him.

Ultimately, it is not a two way street...there is a power differential...Michigan is not' 'partnering' with players and from a supply/demand perspective more elite players want to come to M than spots available.

if you ask someone to save you a spot at lunch, and then you don't do the same when they ask you to. Not to blow it out of proportion, but it doesn't say good things about a friendship when one friend works harder than the other one to make it work. Conley is totally free to look at other places, but we are also totally free to look at other recruits. I hear he's talented, and I want him to stick around, but if he doesn't, we don't want to leave ourselves in the lurch and either be a spot short, or just take someone to take them.

ED: The girlfriend analogy is better: if your girlfriend might be interested in other guys, it means you can look at other girls, too.

I like the concert analogy. Lets say you have two tickets to a cool concert, we'll say Pat Benetar. You invite a friend. A week before the concert, the friend says he might have something else important to do that night, and might not be able to go with you (and pay for his ticket). If you wait for him, you might be stuck paying for his ticket and singing We Belong all by yourself. But there are other people who would love to go with you, so when he can't commit, you say, thanks man, but Tim really wants to go too so I'm gonna go with him.

If you think Hoke's policy is bad, or unfair, or hurts our recruiting process, I don't think you have a good grasp of the game theory that enters into this process. Hoke is playing it exactly right from what I can tell

Just curious how this is unfair from the recruits standpoint. They don't have to commit. They can take all 5 official visits before committing if that's what they choose to do. It sounds to me like you think recruits should be able to commit, take visits, and possibly decommit at will. I know they are kids but teaching kids to honor their word should not be taken lightly. Football or not.

I actually think it's both correct from a game theory / benefits Michigan standpoint AND a fairness standpoint. From what we understand, all the recruits understand this policy at the outset, i.e. there is no confusion or misleading information given to them. From what we understand, Hoke will not change his mind on the commits and pull offers last minute just because he thinks he thinks he can land a better commit, i.e. if the recruit is committed to Michigan, Michigan is committed to the recruit.

The only unfair thing I can see in the whole process is that the timeframe has become compressed and these kids feel massive pressure to commit before they're ready, leading to conundrums like this. But that's not Hoke / Michigan's fault, that's just the environment we're operating in. If anything it has more to do with twitter, fans like us, and sites like Rivals and Scout that are to blame for making the process what it is. We have no evidence that Hoke puts undue pressure on kids or uses scare tactics, or whatever you want to call it. The only evidence we have is that he's extremely open and creates a warm family atmosphere. Seems fair to me.

Everything about it, on both sides of it (high scool players & college staffs) is just over the top. As a fan, I wish I could just ignore all the recruiting hoopla and see what the coaches end up with when practice / game reports come in.

I'm guessing that a lot of people using the marriage analogy aren't actually married. For those who are married, did you date or let your fiancée date while engaged (not cheating, actually dating with your fiancée's blessing)? I would guess that this is not an overly successful strategy. Just wondering.

I don't know why this is even an issue here. Hoke has the easiest and most straightforward policy I've ever heard regarding early commts and I'm sure they all know it before they give a verbal. If Conley takes visits we no longer will hold a spot for him and will begin actively recruiting for a replacement because he is no longer considered committed. How hard is that to understand how in God's name is that "unfair" on any level to a recruit?

The engagment analogy is the best one though. When you propose (offer) you are signalling your interest in a future committment in marrage (signing LOC). If your fiance accepts your ring but then several months later says "I'm really not sure anymore....I think I want to date a few more guys to make SURE I made the right decision accepting your proposal" would anyone here think the upcoming marrage was a certain event anymore? And would your now dating others fiance say it was "unfair" if you started dating (recruiting) someone new as well?

There are committments made, verbal ones, that signify interest and intent for a much bigger and more permanent ones.

No, not at all. I am saying that Kelly is pursuing him and made the call to talk to him and not conley or his parents call, then Kelly is a hypocrite. Kelly has the same policy as Hoke. If you commit to Oregon, do not visit elsewhere or your schollie is pulled. If kelly made overtures, then Kelly is a hypocrite. If you are committed elsewhere, Hoke does not make overtures. Same policy otherwise.

And it's consistent for Kelly and Hoke. If you come or a visit, you weren't really committed to the other guy in the first place. And that's their problem. If they want to try and honor it, or look elsewhere, that's on them.

but now that kids are giving their verbals so much earlier than even 10 years ago, it's inevitable that there will be some decommits, and not just for Michigan. It's unreasonable to think that there won't be any 18-year-old seniors who have second thoughts about verbal commitments they made when they were 17-year old juniors. I would assume that Hoke & Co. understand this, and make plans for it.

Conley isn't expressing an interest in just any western school; it's not Washington State or UCLA or Cal—it's the hot, sexy program out in Eugene that's #2 in the country and a pick by plenty of people to play in the NC game. Even if Conley really is "solid for Michigan," it would be an unusual 18-year-old to not be intrigued by interest from one of the hottest programs in the country right now.

I don't blame him at all. He has lots of good options, teams will wait for him, and frankly, he probably has better options than Michigan if he's just looking for opportunities to get the ball. If I were a big-time receiver, I'd be looking at WVU, Oklahoma State, Oklahoma, etc.

Again - people need to not follow 17-year-olds this closely, because they, I don't know, change their minds all the time. If Conley comes to UM, then that is awesome. If not, wish the kid the best but won't think about it again. Luckily, there is actual football to care about in the interim.

These are 17- and 18-year old kids. There have been a lot of analogies thrown around this thread, but there is a very practical problem for the coaches: if kids are looking around, then the coaches need to look around too lest there be a signing-day surprise.

I don't blame any kid that wants to look around but the coaches need to recruit a class and reserved spots are only for those people done looking around.

That's odd... I could have sworn that there were plenty of critical comments here about Al Borges and his playcalling after the Notre Dame game. And more than a few after the Alabama game too.

But aside from that, nobody is preventing you from posting your opinions and observations about anything here. You say you don't "give two shits" about people questioning you, but you also complain about getting "voted down." Those seem a bit contradictory to me.

I think part of the problem is the idiotic comment moderation scheme in place here. It's routine for entirely innocuous or reasonable comments to be labeled "trolling" or "flamebait," and "overrated" and "underrated" make no sense whatsoever. It would be far better to go back to the old simple upvoting and downvoting scheme, with some regulations in place that restrain and penalize those who gratuitously and habitually neg comments. I agree that far too many here downvote simply and only because they disagree with an opinion.

I know it's a 17 year old kid and It's his life. I get and understand all that. I'm just saying Michigan was there before anybody else even knew about him. At least call the coaches and let them know what's going on. This is eerily similar to P. Brown last year. According to Bill Greene, his parents want him to travel and his coach is against it. If Oregon's whole coaching staff is coming Monday, an offer is imminent. This is not going to end well.